We performed a comparison between k6 Open Source and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, OpenText and others in Load Testing Tools."The standout feature of k6 is its strong focus on API performance testing."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"Both the professional and cloud versions of Micro Focus LoadRunner use the same scripting or programming to execute performance modeling operations. This feature allows users to use various programming languages such as Java, C, or C++, which can run within either of the two environments. This flexibility in the programming language is a strong point of the software."
"The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover."
"The product supports a wide variety of technology compared to any other tool."
"The most valuable feature is having load generators in countries where we don’t have access to them."
"The reports are very relevant to the customers’ expectations."
"One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols."
"The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center."
"One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter."
"There are three modules in the system that are different products packaged into one, and they can sometimes be difficult to figure out, so they should be better integrated with each other."
"CI/CD integration could be a little bit better. When there's a test and if you see that there are high response times in the test itself, it would be great to be able to send an alert. It would give a heads-up to the architect community or ops community."
"In terms of new features, they can natively integrate with Chaos engineering tools such as Chaos Monkey and AWS FIS. With LoadRunner, we can generate load, and if Chaos tools are also supported natively, it will help to get everything together."
"We did have some challenges with the initial implementation."
"There is a steep learning curve for the product, too."
"Their documentation is not technical enough for us. We would like to have much deeper technical documentation so that we can self-serve without constantly having to go back to them and ask."
"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."
"Its scripting features need improvement."
k6 Open Source is ranked 17th in Load Testing Tools with 1 review while OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 6th in Load Testing Tools with 39 reviews. k6 Open Source is rated 7.0, while OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of k6 Open Source writes "Offers good scalability and has the ability to integrate with various systems and services". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud writes "Enterprise modeling, server maintenance, and competitive pricing". k6 Open Source is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad and RadView WebLOAD, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter and Apache JMeter.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
